Why their interest in Circumcision ?

[name]

why would "they" be interested in whether somebody is circumcized or not ?

in the URL i post below (found via cryptome.org), you will find what is known as database schemas, used for the purpose of interchanging data between various branches of the US govt. for people who do not understand much about computers, it describes the fields or "attributes" used to store data about various subjects of interest to US govt agencies, like persons, events, vehicles, locations ... these so-called "attributes" together describe a certain subject, for example a person.

now, if you look at the stuff in the link below, you'll get a pretty good look at exactly *what* the US govt stores about people and what they are interested about. as you'll see, they are interested in much more than just name and address of a person, and they are interested in many more subjects than just "persons": they want to know about aircraft, places, cars, boats, organizations, capabilities (of a person), incidents, medical and biometric records, ... pretty much the usual data one would imagine big bureaucracies collect.

i know a bit about the hunger for information of bureaucracies, having worked for a bank doing databases myself. but the one thing that stuck out here was that they store whether somebody is circumcized or not. this is so weird that i cant start imagining for what they'd store it. circumcision does not identify anybody and also does not by itself identify somebody with a distinct group: while jews and muslims do it for religious reasons, christians (or better, "westerners") and other demographic groups often circumcize for medical, hygienic or "potency" reasons. does anybody have an idea why "they" would be interested in this weird piece of data ?

if you want to look youself, the NIEM or "national information exchange model" as it is called, is hosted at the university of georgia, here:

http://tinyurl.com/q8opj

if you dont understand what this is all about, do this to find the circumcision bit: on the left side of the bar immediately below the two buttons click on the link "PersonType" (NOT on the small "c" to the left !), you'll see that the column to the right side of the bar changes. Now look for the subtitle "Properties as subject" (in bold letters) on the right column, and browse below it for the link "c:PersonCircumcisionIndicator". There you have it. The small "c" BTW denotes that this attribute belongs to a set of attributes they call the "common core", meaning that there is not any specific agency requesting it, but that all agencies use it. if you browse the attribute sets you'll also find other weird stuff they're interested in,

So: for what would the US govt want this weird piece of data ? Any ideas ?

 

[tschai]

Could it be a possible way to ID a "body" as a simple visual attribute in a list of attributes, such as "half moon shaped scar on left arm, missing two front teeth, circumcised" etc.?

It certainly wouldn't be a "positive" ID mode-there are much more efficient ways to do that such as dental records, finger prints, DNA and so on-but if a body were presented as that of a certain individual and it were known that said individual were indeed, circumcised-and the corpus delecti turned out NOT to be-but this is a real long shot and purley speculative.

Perhaps as a "reference" for someone creating replicants? Only individuals that would have "intimate" knowledge of the persons physiognomy-say a physician, certainly a wife or lover, acquaintances who'd seen said person without clothing-such as his soccer cronies in the showers...but if an unknown agency were creating "copies" they might want to be certain they had all traits covered, just in case...

But from what we know about the technology of the Reptoids et al they have the ability to create perfect copies of anyone they want, right? Or is that only "soul" copies-I remember reading this in the article Secret Underground Bases-I may have faulty recollection on that point-I'll have to re-read that.

So how this information would ultimately be of any use other than what I suggest is anybody's guess.

 

[j0da]

If the act of circumcision damages a person in a certain way, in cartain age, etc - circumcised people may share some mental/biological vulnerability and as a group - they may be manipulated/attacked in a way which exploits that particular vulnerability.
I don't know if that level of manipulation is within reach of military, but on the other hand - if there is an information stored somewhere - it can be accesed by anybody willing to look, not only by those who collect the information.

That's my guess.

 

[vinny]

If the act of circumcision damages a person in a certain way, in cartain age, etc - circumcised people may share some mental/biological vulnerability and as a group - they may be manipulated/attacked in a way which exploits that particular vulnerability.

That would be my guess too. Laura has written some about psychological/emotional imprinting (in Secret History, I think), and how the first few days after birth are formative times involve some very deep-rooted imprinting that happens as a natural part of the brain's development - a good opportunity for manipulation, yes?

 

[manitoban]

If the act of circumcision damages a person in a certain way, in cartain age, etc - circumcised people may share some mental/biological vulnerability and as a group - they may be manipulated/attacked in a way which exploits that particular vulnerability.

That would be my guess too. Laura has written some about psychological/emotional imprinting (in Secret History, I think), and how the first few days after birth are formative times involve some very deep-rooted imprinting that happens as a natural part of the brain's development - a good opportunity for manipulation, yes?

I think this is true, as I discovered with my baby a few years ago. I couldn't believe how many people became so angry when I chose NOT to circumcise my son. These were people who did not have religious or cultural reasons , and many of them seemed to me to be acting quite irrationally on the subject. Now I'm wondering if actually I was observing the "control" system in action, through the various OP's and sheep around me who somehow were attempting to influence me.

 

[tschai]

You are probably right about this...had not thought about that aspect. Should know better. Perhaps this particular "mutilation" sends a special type of pain/ fear response to the 4D denizens-kind of like some sort of "delicacy" they take special pleasure in...would not put it past them.

They seem to take absolutely every opportunity they can to exploit us. Yes. Should know better by now.

 

[Tigersoap]

I can't prove what I am saying here but I have heard that circumcision is also done by people who are not specially religious or anything like that. My wife read that in some woman's magazine If I am correct.

It's even promoted to prevent sexual diseases in Africa :

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0604230375apr23,1,6377640.story

Now I don't see why circumcision would help though...

 

[j0da]

But persuading people to have just one sex partner at a time and men to be circumcised could help end what Halperin called a "perfect storm" of the disease in southern Africa. Circumcision appears to cut HIV transmission by 60 percent to 75 percent.

Do you see what I see? I'd love to see some evidence to this claim, but I suppose they haven't got any.

 

[Guest]

But persuading people to have just one sex partner at a time and men to be circumcised could help end what Halperin called a "perfect storm" of the disease in southern Africa. Circumcision appears to cut HIV transmission by 60 percent to 75 percent.

Do you see what I see? I'd love to see some evidence to this claim, but I suppose they haven't got any.

Circumcision exposes the glans of the penis. When a foreskin is present it tends to trap vaginal fluids, which can seep into the membrane of the glans, while without the foreskin the fluids are exposed to air and dry up. Thus, it can decrease probability of infection for the male. For the female, however, it can increase probablity of infection due to increased friction where the glans rubs male fluids into vaginal tissue.

All of this is moot, however, if there is rudimentary hygene. In an age where hygene is a simple matter of information, circumcision is completely inexcusible. It purpose in many societies was as an initiatory rite, similar to hazing but deeply ingrained in the young person's primitive centers as a high pain point surrounded by a lot of indoctrinating ritual.

Even in ancient Hebrew society, it was performed well into childhood. Modern circumcision, however, upon a newborn is an inexusable act with no ritual but a sterile stainless steel medical environment (unless one is Hebrew and then a rabbi sucks the blood from the wound of the baby, which nobody seems to consider the least bit strange :O ).

So we have an arbitrary marking at a pre-conceptual age that becomes a male's first impression of life, and probably a reference for every event that follows. I think it makes males more controllable, aggressive and willing to obey authority (the man with the knife).

 

[anart]

You might be interested in this site - http://stopinfantcircumcision.org/crick-wald.htm

It discusses -- The international movement to protect the human rights of minors to their own bodily integrity has strong support from some of the world's greatest scientists.

I find George Wald's comments particularly interesting.

 

[Tigersoap]

There is a lot of medical papers in favor of Circumcision against HIV virus o_O

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Display&dopt=pubmed_pubmed&from_uid=8245525&tool=ExternalSearch

And I found this text which I think is interesting :

Male and female Circumcision

http://www.lpj.org/Nonviolence/Sami/articles/eng-articles/circ.eng.htm

Let's not forget that Female circumcison is also performed to this day.
Men can live without a little bit of skin (not that I think it's cool, even on a necklace) but depriving women of one of their sensitive sexual organ is, well...barbaric.

 

[efields]

I can't prove what I am saying here but I have heard that circumcision is also done by people who are not specially religious or anything like that. My wife read that in some woman's magazine If I am correct.

It's even promoted to prevent sexual diseases in Africa :

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0604230375apr23,1,6377640.story

Now I don't see why circumcision would help though...

How about its more hygenic. I think thats about it.

 

[j0da]

I find it very bizzare idea to "fix" nature in order to maintain hygene. "Let's cut this skin, so our lil fella will stay clean "there", won't contract illnesses and hey - it may even become fashionable someday!" Why don't we do the same with teeth for example? Forget those annoying toothbrushes and tiresome brushing routine. Ultimate solution to decay? Let's pull those petty teeth out and replace them with brand new implants. They will last forever - you can even leave them to your grandson in your will. :D

 

[Ben]

That's what I always thought about it. I never really considered the idea of an intentional traumatic experience. I did, however, find it completely illogical to suggest that the body, which Judaism believes was created by their 'God', Yahweh, would be improved by us mutilating it!

 

[knowledge_of_self]

So we have an arbitrary marking at a pre-conceptual age that becomes a male's first impression of life, and probably a reference for every event that follows. I think it makes males more controllable, aggressive and willing to obey authority (the man with the knife).

This is also my take on the subject of circumcision. I was born in Iran, so every boy I ever met was circumcised. When I found out about this ritual (around 6 years old) I was quite disgusted to hear that mothers volunteer their babies to be brutally cut at infancy. The only mother I have ever known that gave her child a choice of whether or not he wanted to be circumcised was my aunt. She refused to circumcise her second son right when he was born, because her first son reacted very badly to the circumcision that occurred right at birth. For example he would barely eat anything, and thus became quite ill. And you can bet that she was labeled many names for choosing not to circumcise her second son right away. It is interesting because the first son is now found out to have mental damage, and is currently on medication for it. The second son chose to have himself circumcised at the age of 4 and I remember talking to him about it. I was asking him whether it hurt, and why he would even do it. He told me he was very exited because he was glorified for choosing to do it and everyone was calling him "big man" and giving him presents, so he wanted to do it for the glorification of becoming a man.

Nina